King_Hrothgar

I didn't see anything in there that suggested it was going to take a long time. It all looks fairly mundane to me.

I see no reason why you can't learn basic airmanship on an A-10, Ka-50 or F-86 for that matter. And the T-45 is little more than a renamed Hawk. As for the Yak-130, I don't consider it high priority, it's just an aircraft that is of interest to me and the one to do if someone really wants to do another trainer. My main interest in DCS is 1970 to 1991. The reason is there were a lot of aircraft types fielded and most of them are still around in some form or another. They also have the advantage of readily available information unlike the truly modern stuff.

I don't think anyone is disputing the AIM-9P4. In regards to MP, there is the 104th server and time period restricted servers (WW2 and Korea atm) that are occupied. Given the popularity of the MiG-21 even on 104th, I think a MiG-21 vs F-5 server will do fairly well provided it has decent mission design and support. It could also be a good playground for the Su-25A, A-10A, UH-1 and Mi-8 too.

DCS draws in new players at a fairly decent rate from what I've seen. Just about every time I hop on 104th I find myself training a new Ka-50 pilot. So the continued sales of the older modules should be sufficient incentive to keep them up to date. They don't generate as much revenue as a new module does, but basic upkeep is also a lot less work than building a new module.

Thanks for the update Zeus. It's a shame we couldn't have it this weekend, but I fully understand that sometimes it just isn't possible. Hopefully we can get it early next week.

I seriously doubt LNS will be releasing anything before the end of the year. They aren't likely to get much done next week and though we know what the modules are, they haven't officially announced them yet. An official product announcement before the end of the year seems possible, though I'm not expecting one.

I find rockets perfectly adequate (or did last week when I last used them). I don't use bombs often so can't comment on those. Now I would love to get an F-5E with AGM-65 support, as it was very common among those actually used in combat. But I don't think anything beyond that would be appropriate. It's a 1970's F-5E I want, so things like AIM-7's and LGB's aren't on my wishlist for it. I also think 2x AIM-9's should be enough. Ideally we'll get the AIM-9P (rear aspect only) + AIM-9P (all aspect). For the sake of completeness, AIM-9L and AIM-9M support would also be nice. I don't think the aircraft had to be modified to use them, but I could be wrong.

The Yak-130 is a trainer I'd actually be excited about, but not because it's a trainer. That thing can carry everything from laser/GPS guided anything to dumb bombs and sharpened sticks. And it does it in an agile airframe with a fully glass cockpit. Additionally, it seems the Russians are eager to sell them to anyone with the cash (and even a few without), so there shouldn't be any issues with secrecy. I doubt RAZBAM will take that one up though, they've toyed around publicly with a lot of different planes, but none of them are eastern designs afaik.

Easy choice for me, Mirage 2k. Didn't even know the new Star Wars movie would be out this week till reading it here.

All of that seems rather dubious to me. Especially the part about needing two American trainers. I question the point of having even a single trainer aircraft in DCS and we already have 3. Now I do get that some people just want to fly trainer aircraft forever because they like them. That's fine and a perfectly reasonable thing. The MSFS series made its name off the Cessna 172, so there is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting a T-38 or T-2. But you shouldn't lie to yourself or the community. You don't want them because you think a training campaign is going to help new players learn to use combat aircraft. Instead, you want those particular aircraft because you want them. It's ok, I promise not to make fun of you. I have a bit of a thing for the Maul M7 with floats, so I'm in no position to poke fun at anyone for liking the T-2 Buckeye.:smilewink:

ED is doing the F/A-18C, it doesn't get any more multirole than that. I would like to see an eastern equivalent as well such as a modern MiG-29, J-10 or JF-17.

I greatly prefer single seat aircraft when it comes to fixed wing because multi seat involves dealing with dumb AI, even dumber humans (assuming any are even available) or trying to do two crew positions at once. Thus, the A-7 is what I'd be most interested in from those. DCS could really use a few supersonic ground pounders, the A-7 and Su-17 series are top of that list for me. The SEPECAT Jaguar and MiG-27K would also be cool. I probably would not buy an F-15E as the F/A-18C is more appealing to me and does the same thing and more. Currently, I have every plane in DCS except the three trainers. And that's despite some of them being offered for as little as $12 at one point. That should tell the developers everything they need to know about my thoughts on those.

Nah, they will keep things as is for a month or two more I think. So the Mirage will require the 1.5/2.0 beta/alpha just like the L-39 and NTTR do. Eventually it will all be merged to a single "stable" client, but I think we are a couple months from that. They've said the first step towards that will be merging 1.5 and 2.0 once the Caucuses map is made compatible with 2.0.

I saw that too, but I still think it will be Friday.

Funny thing is I'd be surprised if it were released today, I'm expecting tomorrow at the earliest.

The store says by December but everywhere else I've always seen them write something along the lines of mid December. In any case, Friday seems a likely date, assuming it's good to go.

Pre-ordered, they can now release it. :P

Thanks, exactly what I was looking for.

I'm just trying to get a clearer picture of what it can do. I know what its air to air capabilities are and I am also well aware that the Viggen is mainly a bomber, not a fighter. I play both roles, so both capabilities are of interest to me with these types of aircraft. A forum member posted an armament sheet for the AJS-37, so I know what that offers. Just trying to get the same for the Mirage 2000C RDI S5.

Limited budget mate. Just trying to figure out how much use I'd actually get out of it. I'm also eyeing the Viggen but will probably only get one or the other, not both.

I'm trying to decide if I want to pre-order it or not tonight. I have one question that needs to be answered first and despite a few searches, I haven't been able to come up with an answer. The question is what specific armament options are there on a per pylon basis? I know the outer pair are Magic only, the middle pair are Super 530D only and the fuselage stuff is a mix of bombs/rockets/tanks, I just don't know what configurations are possible on each of those inner pylons. A list or graphic would be great. Thanks!

It isn't just one problem keeping WW2 fans away, it's several. But damage modeling is pretty high on the list for me and those I've spoken with on TS3 and other WW2 CFS forums. The lack of content (maps, AI units and so on) is another major issue. But the thing about updating the damage modeling is, it helps the game as a whole. It's just as important to a UH-1 as it is to a Bf-109 and so is something the whole community can get behind. So I give it higher priority even if a lack of content is a bigger issue for the WW2 side of things.

We will soon have a few flyable 1970's and early 1980's fighters in DCS, so I think it's time to expand the missiles available to both AI and FC3 planes to stuff that encompasses those eras. Specifically, I'm thinking an AIM-9G, AIM-9L, AIM-7E, AIM-7F, R-23R and R-23T. This would allow for mission builders to create pre-1985 scenarios with appropriate air to air missile types. A good example of a limitation currently is the MiG-21Bis vs F-4E. The AIM-7M didn't enter service until the 1980's, but the F-4E is from the 1960's. Yes they could later carry the 7M, but not before they existed and some F-4E users never had the newer model (thinking of Iran specifically).

Scripted system failures work pretty well, it's the reaction to bullets (especially for AI planes) that needs work. But yeah, the radiator thing is a nice touch. Never encountered it myself but I'll trust that it's there.

It was "Lock On: Modern Air Combat." In any case, I'm really hoping for a tiger. We have 2 utility choppers already with two more anti-tank equipped utilities on the way. When it comes to proper attack choppers, we have a prototype Ka-50 and might at some point have a BST developed Mi-24.